
FirePro V4900 vs Quadro K2000M

FirePro V4900
Popular choices:

Quadro K2000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro V4900 is positioned at rank 212 and the Quadro K2000M is on rank 58, so the Quadro K2000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V4900
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro V4900 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K2000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K2000M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K2000M holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $47), it costs 36% less, resulting in a 55.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+55.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($47) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro V4900 and Quadro K2000M

FirePro V4900
The FirePro V4900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,009 points.

Quadro K2000M
The Quadro K2000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,004 points. Launch price was $265.27.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro V4900 scores 1,009 and the Quadro K2000M reaches 1,004 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro V4900 is built on TeraScale 2 while the Quadro K2000M uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 480 (FirePro V4900) vs 384 (Quadro K2000M). Raw compute: 0.768 TFLOPS (FirePro V4900) vs 0.5722 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000M).
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,009 | 1,004 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 480+25% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.768 TFLOPS+34% | 0.5722 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB+50% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro V4900 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2000M has 2 GB. The Quadro K2000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11 (FirePro V4900) vs 11.1 (11_0) (Quadro K2000M). Vulkan: None vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11 | 11.1 (11_0) |
| Vulkan | None | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6+5% |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro V4900) vs NVENC (Quadro K2000M). Decoder: UVD 3.1 vs PureVideo HD (VP5). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (FirePro V4900) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000M).
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | NVENC |
| Decoder | UVD 3.1 | PureVideo HD (VP5) |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro V4900 draws 75W versus the Quadro K2000M's 55W — a 30.8% difference. The Quadro K2000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro V4900) vs 350W (Quadro K2000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 55W-27% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 163mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 13.5 | 18.3+36% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2000M costs 36.2% less ($17 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 21.5 (FirePro V4900) vs 33.5 (Quadro K2000M) — the Quadro K2000M offers 55.8% better value. The Quadro K2000M is the newer GPU (2012 vs 2011).
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $200 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $47 | $30-36% |
| Performance per Dollar | 21.5 | 33.5+56% |
| Codename | Turks | GK107 |
| Release | November 1 2011 | June 1 2012 |
| Ranking | #882 | #886 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















